TheSkiffView
LEFT OUT
Students excluded from Core revision
The Core Curriculum Committee, which was charged by
the Faculty Senate to propose a new core curriculum,
is meeting regularly.
But behind closed doors.
The academic prestige of the university is on the line.
A new core curriculum will affect what classes are offered
and potentially change the size of some departments.
Students and faculty have a right to know not only what
decisions the committee will make, but the debate and
reasoning behind those choices. The meetings should
be open.
Many faculty members strongly criticized the Common
Undergraduate Experience proposal last spring because
they felt it had been drafted with little input. Hopes
of landing a proposal on the chancellors desk
that semester were quickly dashed.
In response to criticism, the Faculty Senate hosted
town hall meetings, created Internet forums and actively
sought more feedback. Many professors worked tirelessly,
meeting twice a month to work out differences.
But closed meetings could jeopardize that hard work.
The central question is this: What if the committee
produces a proposal, that like its predecessors, is
met with harsh words? Will the Faculty Senate have enough
time to approve a proposal by the end of the semester,
which the chancellor has indicated he wants?
Probably not.
Open meetings allow for quick feedback, giving committee
members more time to revise a proposal. Waiting until
after Nov. 20 for such feedback could be a recipe for
disaster.
The faculty need to pass a proposal by semesters
end. We cant discuss this forever.
|
|